Jump to content

We're moving to Discord!

Come join in the discussion here!

You can also still find out all the latest news on TWITTER and FACEBOOK

Thank you for your continued support, and we look forward to welcoming you shortly.

The Warcradle Team


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Advanced deployment of two squadrons of armoured cruisers can give you plenty of spectacular firepower in the early game, use a dieppe squadron for more reserved mediums and avoiding handing your opponent destroy all mediums too easily or a squadron of artillery subs.
  2. I think maybe RA(2) on a medium is too much RA as it would be the only RA(2) medium in the game. Seems interesting though.
  3. Your math is a little off here...that should be 295 which still isn't small but it's 50 points smaller!
  4. It would be cool to see them put the Boston and friends into a box set, perhaps with an anti submarine escort or something else exciting.
  5. If he has Cbourgs, scout fliers with oversized mines and a few other high aggresion high firepower but fragile units his opponent may find it hard to decide what to engage. I think that is the point of this particular setup.
  6. Or alternatively, corrosive/debilitating effect markers are left on the squadron as a whole. The number of markers on a squadron are added to the final dice pool of any attack that targets the unit with the tokens. Since you have to deal damage for that to happen worst case is someone hitting for one point of damage 5 times on a medium squadron...and no one ever repairs one of those and no moral checks are lost. And then someone gets 5 extra dice on an attack against a model that no one cared about anyways. Actually I suppose you could do 7 of 8 bases out of a grand company one at a time. Cyber tanks can add debilitating without damage I suppose...but this does provide some benefit to the fact that debilitating effects are often short lived and only on some occasions make a difference as they are, particularly with cyber dumping any/all on the nearest tank that will be the one that probably gets one marker from an unimpressive shot. Some things might have to go up in cost with this change if they did that...but it could be cool and representative of the collateral damage that is left about by the directorate.
  7. The way that model is designed? Not a chance. Also at that point it's just annother royal oak but not quite as good.
  8. My assumption was that the proper place to measure from was the center (die point) of the marker.
  9. Because if they just rolled one extra die, why don't they just increase all the pinpoint values by one? JK...there's no good reason to reroll one pinpoint die as opposed to rolling one extra die unless you don't want to kill what you're shooting at yet.
  10. Bidding victory points is an interesting thought... Not sure even that would be worth it though?
  11. I like the choices they made to differentiate the vessels. We will have to see how they play, just no time for it yet.
  12. How much of this is a result of the ridiculous capacity of the wraith to dogpile objectives?
  13. The point of measuring out every turn was to give an illustration of the sort of point value a +1, +2 ect advantage sits at as to what can be brought to the table with it. Currently Din is mentioned as the 'most over the top' of the factions. Their powerful brawling capacity, ability to bring in forces where they need them, hover and access to the hit and run move combined with overall solid stats have been a common complaint. Using hit and run with their CQB values they even have the ability to hit one unit, move and CQB a different one even without the battle being a complete brawl. Or, importantly enough from hit and run, reduce enemy model count with their primary guns, move in CQB the reduced unit. Removing a unit before an opponent can utilize it is naturally very powerful, not only do you remove a threat but you don't loose anything in the deal. A smart opponent won't be engaging such that only one unit has the chance to fight you obviously, and also shouldn't be so reliant on the utility of one unit that they can't afford to loose it. So in a well played game the loss of the squadron that was destroyed shouldn't cripple the one player's capacity to retaliate entirely and he should be able to use an abused unit to hit an unactivated threat before things get bad so the advantage of a single turn of initiative victory should not stretch too far beyond the one squadron sniped efficiently in a game of two experienced players. The problem arises when an advantage is gained turn after turn. Last turn one player's firepower was slightly less because of a premature loss the turn before. It happens again and once again they are slightly 'less'. Quite quickly that slightly less starts to add up, particularly against a cannily used force like the din that can use hit and run to hammer two choice units. When you do take the opportunity to use your points to break this cycle on a close roll, the retaliation had better be worth it. You need to preserve models equal to the extra points spent (possibly) or really do more than that if you want to do more than fight a cycle to a stand still. The last punch line is that, the large the game the less initiative matters given two players that are good at hedging their bets, build equal forces and understand when and when not to push forces to take cover even if it would result in a lack of firepower or when to allow a hit unit to die in order to pass commands to a high powered unit ready to go before it is stricken. So the games in which the points are most important are the small games where their cost is most crippling. 1/2 points of damage every turn before you can act in 6000 points is pretty 'whatever'. If you're a better player otherwise you can deal with that, or if the dice are just a little more on your side you're ok. 1/2 more points of damage every turn at 1500 points is pretty huge. Well used units may even be putting out 3/4 points of damage in either situation. at 6000 points maybe both sides will have more, and the points will be a smaller % of what you're putting out...but then you've also lost a smaller % of your force on any given turn due to initiative rolls. My problem is not that it 'costs' to use the points. It's that they are less important by far in the big games and beyond reach in the small games where the ability to at least try to jocky for initiative is very important. In those small games the sides that have the initiative penalty are punished hard for trying. Lastly, Why does a bonus of +1 exist? Why aren't the bonuses +0, +1, +2. It's not a huge thing at all...but is there ever going to be a faction that has less than a +1? And even then why bother calling a +1 a bonus when everything else gets more from the core set? Not really an important arguement mind you as it's a trivial simplification. I just don't get why you'd bother assigning everything an artificially inflated number other than it might make someone feel better about having unenthusiastic mercs because their number sounds bigger.
  14. So...I've noticed that the logistics point thing offers NO advantage to a side with 'cheaper' points. We have 3 patterns Right: Dindrenzi: +3 with 30 points to upgrade Almost Everyone Else +2 with 25 points to upgrade Directorate +1 with 20 points to upgrade Only directorate has an option to get a +1 everyone else for 0 points. For 20 points directorate can tie everyone and still loose against Dindrenzi, meaning that in 3 turns you've spent 60 points to tie everyone, that's another tank on the field for your enemy in most cases. To tie the Dindrenzi Everyone other than directorate has to spend 25 points. Tying them for 3 turns is 75 points. Directorate are looking at 40 points a turn for a whopping 120 over only 3 turns. Now we get into the realm where everyone has to be trying at +4. The directorate are aching at 60 points a turn. non Din forces are at 50 points and the Din, while catching up in cost are sitting on only 30 points. +5 is costly for anyone but it should be noted that it should garner a highly likely chance of owning the field initiative against most foes. The directorate are still behind by miles spending 80 points. non-dins otherwise are only spending a painful 75 a turn, and the din are spending a major but not as large 60 point bubble of points. +6 This is where most forces max out. Din can fork up a hackishly large 100 points along with 'everyone else'. The din, still have a 10 point advantage at only 90. +7 is the absurd point where 'everyone else' almost catches the din's initiative bonus with a slap to the face in the form of 125 points a turn for terrans and 120 for the Din. Now I know if you're trying to win initiative with a bid every turn you're being a fool. Those point values were to help 'mark' the assigned points values of everyone's bonuses. The problem I have with the current layout is that initiative bonus's are 'handed' to the sides that have most use for them. However with forces like Aquans and Din having clear cut advantages while they have the initiative greater than their foes with the hit and run and over MARs providing them with a solid number of options other sides don't have. Closer ranged factions have to seize the initiative when their foe makes a mistake then and comes in too close or misjudges firepower advantage, fumbles a role ect. Not only is it not possible to do this so long as your opponent does not remain completely blind to their gamble, but having the capacity to try if they do drop the ball costs you more the worse your chances were to begin with. I would like to suggest that play testers try out tweaking initiative strategy in the game, I believe it will bring the for-runners of over the top strategic advantage into the fold a little without other challenges. A suggested starting point: Nations that start with +1 10 points per logistic point up to seven points Nations that start with +2 15 points per logistic point up to five points Nations that start with +3 25 points per logistic point up to three points Terrans to maintain their logistic points flexibility can spend one more point than other +2 nations This will also reduce the cost overall of logistic points to encourage their use further and make them a more active part of strategy. The pattern with this is +1 only Directorate 0pts +2 everyone else other than din, tie at 10 pts a turn for Directorate +3 Din, everyon else ties 20 for directorate 15 for 'others' +4 Din spends 25, everyone else including directorate spends 30 +5 Din Spends 50, Directorate ties at 40 everyone else is at 45 +6 Din spends 75 and everyone else 60, Directorate leads at 50 +7 Din can't get here so they'd better make sure they haven't face palmed so hard their opponents want this so bad. 'everyone else' spends 75, Directorate is spending 60. +8 Directorate and terrans only. Terrans can spend 90 to push hard and Directorate is still spending a substantial 70. With Directorate and terrans plagued by slow speed and short range the ability to buy up their initiative could give them a more significant chance to have an edge once they do get in close instead of leaving the initiative game a painful loss.
  15. Beam in the context of the beam turrets on the dreadnaught refers to the fact that the turrets are positioned on either end of the vessels 'beam', the widest point in the hull. They are just regular guns.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.